Dee Flint wrote:


Not at all. I read the ARRL statement and the FCC rules. I happen to agree
that there is enough flexibility to allow meeting the travel expenses, food
expenses for those who are going down. There is no intent to "make a buck".

My point was that there is no reason to automatically assume that there is
an intent to do wrong.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


Years ago I participated in ham radio communications after a tornado
cleaned out about half of the southern part of Witchta Fall, Tx. The
kind folks of WF housed us in a church, provided sleeping facilities and
fed us. Anyone think that was violating the rule of "pecuniary interest"?

Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote:
Dee Flint wrote:


Not at all. I read the ARRL statement and the FCC rules. I happen to agree
that there is enough flexibility to allow meeting the travel expenses, food
expenses for those who are going down. There is no intent to "make a buck".

My point was that there is no reason to automatically assume that there is
an intent to do wrong.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


Years ago I participated in ham radio communications after a tornado
cleaned out about half of the southern part of Witchta Fall, Tx. The
kind folks of WF housed us in a church, provided sleeping facilities and
fed us. Anyone think that was violating the rule of "pecuniary interest"?

Yes in the sense written in the rules. Now those rules ought to be
rewritten and so one but in real terms yes you according the
publications of the ARRL.

such a rule is stuppid will never be enforced but it a violation never
the less, just as if I drive 60 in 55 zone I'll likely not be stoped
and ticketed but I would still be breaking the law.

Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote:

Years ago I participated in ham radio communications after a tornado
cleaned out about half of the southern part of Witchta Fall, Tx. The
kind folks of WF housed us in a church, provided sleeping facilities and
fed us. Anyone think that was violating the rule of "pecuniary interest"?


"an old friend" replied:

Yes

OK, folks, every one of you who accepted food or lodging in the course of
participating in an emergency communications incident is guilty of violating FCC
rules.

If the Red Cross or Salvation Army (btw, why is there no Salvation Navy)
provided you with some identification garment like a hat or t-shirt, you must
return the garment to the issuing agency. If you have lost or damaged the
garment you must reimburse the RC/SA for the fair market value of the garment.

You should file amended state and federal tax returns accounting for the value
of the freebie meals/lodging/refreshments/transportation which was provided to
you in the course of your volunteer assignment, with copies to all FCC
Commissioners who will review your fitness to continue to hold your Amateur
Radio license.

Or not.

73, de Hans, K0HB

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 03:54:36 GMT, "KØHB"
wrote in t:


crossposting snipped

Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote:

Years ago I participated in ham radio communications after a tornado
cleaned out about half of the southern part of Witchta Fall, Tx. The
kind folks of WF housed us in a church, provided sleeping facilities and
fed us. Anyone think that was violating the rule of "pecuniary interest"?


"an old friend" replied:

Yes

OK, folks, every one of you who accepted food or lodging in the course of
participating in an emergency communications incident is guilty of violating FCC
rules.


Are you talking to every ham? or just the fat, lazy, nacho-cheese
addicted hero-wannabes that hang around this group?


If the Red Cross or Salvation Army (btw, why is there no Salvation Navy)


Ok, I'll bite: Why is there no Salvation Navy?


provided you with some identification garment like a hat or t-shirt, you must
return the garment to the issuing agency. If you have lost or damaged the
garment you must reimburse the RC/SA for the fair market value of the garment.

You should file amended state and federal tax returns accounting for the value
of the freebie meals/lodging/refreshments/transportation which was provided to
you in the course of your volunteer assignment, with copies to all FCC
Commissioners who will review your fitness to continue to hold your Amateur
Radio license.

Or not.


Seems to me that the rules were written that way for a reason. After
all, how many times has someone offered services in exchange for
"donations"? Happens all the time. Even the Red Cross has it's own
definition of "reasonable compensation" when it comes to exec salaries
and bonuses. I doubt that anyone will cry foul if such amenities are
given, but they should certainly not be expected or anticipated, which
is what will happen if the rules are changed to allow such exceptions.
Besides, 'compensation' kinda takes a little weight out of the word
"volunteer".









----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

K=D8HB wrote:
Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote:

Years ago I participated in ham radio communications after a tornado
cleaned out about half of the southern part of Witchta Fall, Tx. The
kind folks of WF housed us in a church, provided sleeping facilities a=
nd
fed us. Anyone think that was violating the rule of "pecuniary interes=
t"?


"an old friend" replied:

Yes

OK, folks, every one of you who accepted food or lodging in the course of
participating in an emergency communications incident is guilty of violat=
ing FCC
rules.

cut

glad to see you agree (at last I mention where I make my cuts Hans
quote
Yes in the sense written in the rules. Now those rules ought to be
rewritten and so one but in real terms yes you according the
publications of the ARRL.

such a rule is stuppid will never be enforced but it a violation never
the less, just as if I drive 60 in 55 zone I'll likely not be stoped
and ticketed but I would still be breaking the law.

unquote

It is still a violation even if no one will ever do anything about it

your efforts at bad jokes not withstanding



=20
Or not.
=20
73, de Hans, K0HB

"KØHB" ) writes:
Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote:

Years ago I participated in ham radio communications after a tornado
cleaned out about half of the southern part of Witchta Fall, Tx. The
kind folks of WF housed us in a church, provided sleeping facilities and
fed us. Anyone think that was violating the rule of "pecuniary interest"?


"an old friend" replied:

Yes

OK, folks, every one of you who accepted food or lodging in the course of
participating in an emergency communications incident is guilty of violating FCC
rules.

If the Red Cross or Salvation Army (btw, why is there no Salvation Navy)
provided you with some identification garment like a hat or t-shirt, you must
return the garment to the issuing agency. If you have lost or damaged the
garment you must reimburse the RC/SA for the fair market value of the garment.

You should file amended state and federal tax returns accounting for the value
of the freebie meals/lodging/refreshments/transportation which was provided to
you in the course of your volunteer assignment, with copies to all FCC
Commissioners who will review your fitness to continue to hold your Amateur
Radio license.

Or not.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Of course, if you reverse the wording, it makes the thing all make more
sense.

You volunteer for something, but they insist you wear a tshirt and hat,
and you MUST pay for it.

They won't provide food, so you've got to pay for it, even though you will
be in a situation where you can't easily bring lunch from home, and don't
have a wide selection of choices.

Then they will bill you for lodging.

Michael VE2BVW

"Michael Black" wrote in message
...

"KØHB" ) writes:
Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote:

Years ago I participated in ham radio communications after a tornado
cleaned out about half of the southern part of Witchta Fall, Tx. The
kind folks of WF housed us in a church, provided sleeping facilities
and
fed us. Anyone think that was violating the rule of "pecuniary
interest"?


"an old friend" replied:

Yes

OK, folks, every one of you who accepted food or lodging in the course of
participating in an emergency communications incident is guilty of
violating FCC
rules.

If the Red Cross or Salvation Army (btw, why is there no Salvation Navy)
provided you with some identification garment like a hat or t-shirt, you
must
return the garment to the issuing agency. If you have lost or damaged
the
garment you must reimburse the RC/SA for the fair market value of the
garment.

You should file amended state and federal tax returns accounting for the
value
of the freebie meals/lodging/refreshments/transportation which was
provided to
you in the course of your volunteer assignment, with copies to all FCC
Commissioners who will review your fitness to continue to hold your
Amateur
Radio license.

Or not.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Of course, if you reverse the wording, it makes the thing all make more
sense.

You volunteer for something, but they insist you wear a tshirt and hat,
and you MUST pay for it.

They won't provide food, so you've got to pay for it, even though you will
be in a situation where you can't easily bring lunch from home, and don't
have a wide selection of choices.

Then they will bill you for lodging.

Michael VE2BVW


Either way, you end up with less than when you started even accounting for
being able to deduct them on your income taxes.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Michael Black" wrote


They won't provide food, so you've got to pay for it, even though you will
be in a situation where you can't easily bring lunch from home, and don't
have a wide selection of choices.


Is that written in Canookian? All the words seem to be English, but .........

73, de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
"Michael Black" wrote


They won't provide food, so you've got to pay for it, even though you w=
ill
be in a situation where you can't easily bring lunch from home, and don=
't
have a wide selection of choices.


Is that written in Canookian? All the words seem to be English, but ....=
..=2E...

73, de Hans, K0HB

ah the open mindedness of hams

one boasts of killing gooks another address canaadian pagoritively

"an Old friend" wrote

KØHB wrote:
"Michael Black" wrote


They won't provide food, so you've got to pay for it, even though you will
be in a situation where you can't easily bring lunch from home, and don't
have a wide selection of choices.


Is that written in Canookian? All the words seem to be English, but
.........

73, de Hans, K0HB

canaadian pagoritively

Well, at least the esteemed ham from Canookia used English words. The esteemed
old_friend from Michigan used words from an unknown language.

Beep beep!
de Hans, K0HB